At the very least, I hope they help kickstart your Birds of a Feather roundtable conversations. (Or if you have a local search addiction as debilitating as mine, perhaps even an after-party conversation over over a pint!)

My high-level takeaways

Google's local search algorithm seems to be maturing

Overall, we've seen a continuation of the gradual trend towards Google rewarding quality on all fronts—from citations to links to reviews. And as more companies have implemented the table stakes of site architecture, keyword- and location-relevant title tags, and claiming their Google My Business pages, quality and authority become the differentiators in competitive markets.

The influence of Google+ on local results is on its way out (if it even existed in the first place)

With the removal of links to Google+ pages from Maps and even from the primary SERP, the always-awkward integration between Plus and Local has now been completely severed.

At this point, I view Google My Business essentially as a UI for structured data* and a conduit to AdWords. While Google's original "business builder" vision may still come to fruition, it clearly won't be under the social umbrella of Google+.

*as well as photos--increasingly important for conversion in a Knowledge Card-heavy future.

Behavioral signals are increasing in importance

Experts judged behavioral and/or mobile signals to make up 9.5% of the algorithm across pack and localized organic results. Granted, that number is not strikingly high, but it's up 38% compared with last year's 6.9%. Research from Darren Shaw and others in the past year has borne out this factor empirically at least in certain markets.

In localized organic results, clickthrough rate was judged the #4 overall factor, and in competitive markets, it moved up 8 spots from 2014, cracking the top ten factors for the first time. A number of experts noted additional behavioral factors beyond clickthrough rate may be playing a role, including post-click time spent on-site or pogosticking.

Citations are still crucial—but your focus should be on quality and consistency

Oddly, citations went from 15.5% to 13.6% as a general ranking factor, but specifically, citation quality and consistency remain top-five factors for both pack results and in competitive markets.

Reading between the lines, it's the quantity of horizontal citations on traditional directories that is becoming less important. Algorithmically, this makes sense, as many of these sites have been hit by successive Panda releases for thin content. The authority passed by mentions on these sites has clearly declined.

Are links the new links?

Overall, links were up 9% as a general factor compared to last year, and a number of experts noted an increased focus on quality links since the rollout of the Local Stack / Snack Pack. Diversity of inbound links as a ranking factor in pack results moved up 22 spots from last year, and even in competitive markets, it rose 10 spots to #14. And in localized organic results, locally-relevant links, location keywords in anchor text, and product/service keywords in anchor text all moved up at least 10 spots in 2015.

Pigeon's shift to the user as centroid has "stuck"

The decline of proximity to centroid as a ranking factor, particularly in competitive markets, now seems just about complete. As Google has gotten better at location detection--on both desktop and mobile results--this rather arbitrary factor has been almost completely discarded. We saw this trend start in earnest with the release of Pigeon last summer, and since the snack pack / local stack rollout, proximity to centroid is the factor that experts think took the biggest hit.

On the other hand, proximity to searcher moved up four spots in the pack-specific rankings, and 10 spots in competitive markets. Clearly, the location of a business matters immensely, but only relative to where people are physically conducting their searches.

Wrapping Up

This is always the case, but this year in particular there are so many pearls of wisdom from the survey's participants that I hope you spend some serious time diving into the comments section of the results. These little nuggets are every bit as interesting as the numbers, if not more so. I truly appreciate the contributions from all participants this year, and look forward to reading comments from our great community members below!

About David-Mihm —
David Mihm is one of the world’s leading practitioners of Local search engine marketing. He has created and promoted search-friendly websites for clients of all sizes since the early 2000’s. David co-founded GetListed.org, which he sold to Moz in November 2012. His annual Local Search Ranking Factors project is among the most important studies of Local SEO.

This makes sense to me. Speaking on the centroid shift, I've talked with many clients in the past that were sure their competitors were beating them because of proximity to the center of a major city. I always doubted that since the rise of searches from mobile devices would change results - Mike Blumenthal did a nice test by driving a few miles down the road & monitoring the changing results... I had a hard time finding that post though. Based on past experience I agree with the survey results - you need to be more aware of mobile searches and drive that traffic to your business, not worry as much about the center (or main business district) for the city.

Like many of the comments in the survey results, I've seen solid onsite optimization & relevant content work wonders for small businesses. That really isn't anything new. Throw in a few well run link building campaigns to get relevant mentions, appropriately internally link, and businesses do well. I see this as industry experts confirming what tests have shown in the past - Make your website relevant & usable for users and you'll be rewarded.

I agree with you, Eric. The best-practices that most practitioners have been executing for years are still best-practices, it's just that they've now become table stakes. And Mobile has upended the local search paradigm really dramatically in terms of measuring and expectations.

Hi David, I've been reading reading your updates on Local Search Ranking Factors since 2013. I guess you can say that I'm an avid follower of yours. Thank you very much for consistently giving updates - this means so much for me as a SEO specialist at Innovate Advertising & Marketing.

Introductions aside, I noticed that link signals value have increased 1.7% while on page signals decrease from 21 percent to 20.3 percent this year. Social Signals also decrease at least .8 percent, while mobile signals increase from 6.9 percent to 9.5 percent.

Frankly speaking, I'm glad that that link signal value have increased but I'm intrigued as to why social signals decreased? This year, Social Media branding is stronger than ever, and more businesses are investing in this platform due to its effectiveness and cost-efficiency. Supposing that more people are trusting brands they see on social media, shouldn't its Local SEO value increase and not the other way around? Any thoughts on this?

Mobile signal growth is predictable on the other hand, and I think its value will rise continuously but not necessarily greater than on page and link signals value in the future.

Thanks David, Moz and all the participants for presenting this survey. Indeed, lots of new take aways to improve the local seo strategy.

David, how do you see the impact of sub-domain on citations? I mean, suppose a site xyz.com has a sub-domain ab.xyz.com and has some citations. Will this sub-domain not gonna damage my main site if NAP remains constant? Also, if I'm getting the local links on my sub-domain, will my main site get any benefit?

Great research and very much informative for an upcoming seo analyst like me, its been an habit for me to search in moz for gaining the knowledge ,these guys provide us the valuable information which is very clear .

Coming to this article i want to know how we can differentiate between quality backlinks and normal backlinks. which factor decides this link is quality

Thanks for putting the effort together. Google is changing things on us at a rapid pace. The popularly called 3 pack, which I like to call the crap pack went universal and google put paid Home Service ads in the organic serps while this study was going on. Yesterday, on desktops Google rolled out phone numbers and actual full addresses into the minimalist crap pack of 3 on desktop but not on mobile. Things are changing at an incredible rate of speed.

Overall Google is shrinking any kind of "free search" visibility that either the pack or organic showed. Ads dominate an amazing amount of space. And now of course we have PAID GOOGLE suggested smb's inside the serps for the home service industry. Those paid placements push down every other site below them. They'll all lose traffic.

Ultimately its a tough environment for local businesses. I'd suggest follow guidelines above in search, but then do a lot of non google things on the web and off the web, plus as much social (again on the web and off the web) to get visibility. I see Google as the looming smb tax collector without having any checks on it. Its tough.

14.7% for Keywords in My Business Title.. Uh Oh! I don`t like where this is headed. Its almost like saying you got to have a spammy business name .. Sounds like a fall back on Google`s part... if this is the case.

To wrap it up, My Business + Links + On-page accounts for over 50%! Wow.. but Y`know we have all noticed this as well.. Thanks for the work.. and everyone`s contribution on this.

Every year I look forward to this analysis by you' all. Super insightful, and as a link lover I'm stoked to see that links were up 9% as a general factor compared to last year. Now if only Google would bring back the 7 pack.

Some of my clients have problems with theire Google My Places listing for more than a year. I experience a lot of problems and headaches trying to solve these kind of problems for my clients. This a hughe and unfair disadvantage for some businesses. This affects local SEO and the quality of search results in Google.

A system like Google My Places shoudn't be so complex in order to keep it up-to-date. Especially because a correct listing is such an important local SEO ranking factor.

David, your local ranking surveys never disappoint. I've been such a fan since the Getlisted.org days. Local Search is such a unique beast and it moves at such different pace. Sometimes it can be confusing.

Your research is always through and informative and I appreciate the depth and breath of opinions by great minds.

I am excited to share the new findings with my fellow SEO's. Keep up the great work!

Hi this is Arun from seo training in chennai i have doing seo for the past 6 months for my website and also i am beginner on this field before entering to seo i got many leads from local business when i started seo my leads are getting fall. After that i searched and every day visit moz for the solution to get my old local business ranking sloution. Here after i will work according to the above chart and expecting a better result. Otherwise if any one having any suggestion please let me know and help me any way thanks for sharing this one....

Wanted to also thank David and yes Moz too for their work on this once again. Every year things change and it appears that Google is at the leading - bleeding - edge of same...and as a LOCAL seach guy, I love that David captures this in spades! Kudos to all the other experts who helped contribute too! And wait'll next year, eh! :-)

I look at the graphic and wonder why businesses continue to ignore the importance of reviews, or at the very least, they don't assign reviews the priority they deserve. Yes, reviews would be in 7th place on this list, but it's one of the easiest to impact in a significant way on a daily basis.

I agree. A lot of feedback I get from businesses is that they are worried about negative reviews. Which to me, doesn't make sense. You should want to know about the negative, otherwise, how will you know what to improve upon.

There is a difference between business feedback collection - which can provide useful information for businesses - and what appears on review sites like Yelp and Facebook. Businesses are incredibly frustrated by review sites, where a single negative review from a customer can cost a business hundreds or even thousands of dollars in business. They often do not represent a representative sample - negative reviews are used to extort favors from businesses, to punish businesses, and to advance the reviewer's agendas. There is little or no way to counter unreasonable reviews. I have several 1-star reviews on Facebook from individuals in other countries -- not because they ever came to my photography studio, but because they are part of click farms and need a certain percentage of low reviews to counter the positive reviews, And despite flagging them several times, Facebook provides no support for removing them.

Businesses do not ignore the importance of reviews. They fear them. Two or three committed persons can destroy a business with impunity - its a troll's paradise.

@David A brilliant post, practically this post will going to help lots of people, hats off for your research and efforts.

Are links the new links? I agree about the links, the link which we were creating earlier and the links which we try to get now days. But i have a very simple question - what type of links you consider a quality link if we talk about Local Search Ranking Factor?

Well I like links that come from local entities of one sort or another that have some relevance or overlap with your service/product. This is certainly a bit self serving but it is also a strategy that works to some level. Phil Rozek and I discussed it on his blog here: http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2015/08/19/ho...

On the one hand it is a form of "barncle seo". On the other hand, using the example its a combination of linkage, local, and social. We do something like this for every smb. We work on the relationships. We look for localness, eyeballs, and relevance to the product/service. When they work they drive traffic. If they don't work, get a different relationship(s). Get as many as you can.

When they work they drive traffic. If their is a lot of overlap or relationship to your service/products they drive relevant traffic. Traffic is the whole idea of higher rankings caused by great links.

There are other excellent ways to get links that will work for your site(s). I'd strive to get organic traffic that is also locally relevant. You want visibility for (local service/local town(s) or city. I want to be found for my service in my community(s). If I'm a divorce lawyer in Baltimore County Maryland, I want the links to help me for those phrases. I really don't care or need to rank for divorce lawyer across the globe. People from Waco Texas aren't going to use my Maryland divorce lawyer services.

David and MOZ again your attention to detail are always at the forefront and that is much appreciated. I too like many others look forward to this list and now I have some homework. To go back through my clients sites to make sure that we've implemented these factors.

Thank you guys so much for all of your efforts in putting together this study. I am new to moz, but the materials (including the information from last year's study) have really helped my business boost our local rankings. You guys rock!

There's a lot of talk it seems about quality/authority of inbound links to GMB landing page URL, e.g. Casey mentions about link authority being gained from the page that is linking to the GMB page rather than just domain.

Here's my question with that, say you have a multi location business with two locations -- based on those opinions do you link in each GMB page to the specific location pages or link both location's GMB pages to the more authoritative homepage of the site?

"I think it is really important that people know that the landing page URL they use on GMB is really crucial. Linking to an inner page or the home page is a decision you should make by checking to see which one ranks higher organically. Also for businesses that have multiple websites or domains, picking the right one can make a big difference in ranking. Provided it doesn’t break the guidelines in any way, I would say always go with the page that is ranking highest organically for the main term you are trying to rank for."

It's good to see that the best practices have pretty much remained the same. Interestingly the challenges of helping local businesses improve their local visibility has also stayed the same - just getting the basic fundamentals right. Business owners are still coming to me laden with NAP inconsistencies, over-ambitious metadata and spammy links.

It's no surprise to me that mobile has increased in its overall ranking factor importance but I am a little shocked that reviews have NOT according to this report. In my view, the review ranking factor seems much lower than I would expect considering how much Google showcases reviews within the local Snack Pack listings now. Overall this research shows how challenging it is for local businesses to strike the right balance and know what to do to get results without a lot of help. I will read in more detail to understand a little clearer.

If Google can colonize mars and populate the planet with 500 million cloned human workers, who can manually review every website on earth and rank it accordingly – imagine the accuracy of the search results that we could get. That’s the idea situation. However, Google can’t do it, so they try to achieve a similar goal using algorithms.